ArticleBMC neurology2026
The evolution of disease criteria in multiple sclerosis: underlying motives and broader implications.
Article in BMC neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionDisease criteria for multiple sclerosis (MS) have changed significantly over the past three decades. The development of biomarkers, particularly MRI, has played an essential role in this process. These changes can lead to several broader implications, which are not always intended or recognized. However, they can have a major impact on patients, healthcare and society. We investigated the changing disease criteria, explored the underlying motives and discuss their implications.
methodsWe identified all publications on MS diagnostic criteria between 1983 and 2024. Through conventional content analysis, we systematically examined the aims of each revision and identified the underlying problems and factors motivating these aims. Furthermore, we assessed the changes made to the content in each revision.
resultsSince the transition from the Poser research criteria to the McDonald clinical criteria in 2001, there has been a significant change in the aims of the criteria, which has continued in subsequent McDonald revisions. Two explicit new aims were to integrate MRI into the diagnostic scheme and to reach an earlier diagnosis of MS whenever possible. Furthermore, the emphasis moved towards criteria that are easy to apply in everyday clinical practice, rather than being exclusively for research purposes. This shift is at least partially connected to the emergence of disease-modifying treatments, which have introduced new diagnostic and monitoring needs. Additionally, advancements in MRI research have contributed to this process. As a result, MRI has become central to the diagnostic criteria over the years, while clinical symptoms now play a much smaller role. DISCUSSION: The shift in the criteria has several broader implications. It has a major impact on how MS is conceptualized as a disease and has expanded the disease spectrum to include new terms such as radiologically isolated syndrome (RIS). It also influences our understanding of the natural course of the disease and calls for a careful balance between early diagnosis and misdiagnosis. Awareness of the process of changes and their broader consequences can help balance the benefits and potential negative effects and helps critically frame the decisions of the 2024 revisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.